Skip to main content

Clegg's Theorem

If I'm honest, there are probably not many children who, when asked what they want to be when they grow up, say 'A mathematician.' Similarly, while many kids want to be famous, have a hit record or play sport for their country, not too many, when asked, would admit that they would want to have a mathematical theorem named after them. But when you're a bit older, you have to admit it's kind of cool. After all, it didn't do Fermat or Pythagoras any harm.

Well, now you can have a theorem named after you - without doing the hard work. A spin-off of the University of Edinburgh,TheoryMine, produces new, unique mathematical theorems which for a small fee (£15) they will assign to you, allowing you to give it whatever name you like.

You might object that, since you didn't devise the theorem, your name can't be attached to it. Well, we don't know if Fermat did devise his 'last theorem' and Pythagoras definitely didn't originate his - and they haven't done too badly. The fact is, the originator of the theorem can do what they like with it, including assigning it to you.

You also might think that this is just another version of the Star Registry idea. You know the one. You pay a fee and the Global Star Registry names a star after you or your loved one. It certainly has some similiarities, but I would argue it is actually much better as a concept.

The trouble with the Star Registry business is, first of all it's not official. It's just a company that allocates these names, but they have no standing. Astronomers will never call that star 'Enid Snoopbottom's star.' And secondly the star was already there, so all they are selling, even were it legit, is a name.

With the theorems, something new has been created for you. This is a genuine mathematical theorem that has not been previously discovered. (If they make a mistake and someone else has priority, they will give you two new theorems in return.) And this is, for real, the actual discovery of the theorem, so your name is genuine. Now it's quite likely that, should another mathematician later make use of this theorem, they won't know it's yours so won't refer to it as 'Enid Snoopbottom's theorem'. But you will have priority - it really does belong to you.

So there you have it. The theorem above is a genuine mathematical theorem by the name of Clegg's Theorem. (What does it mean? I haven't a clue. That's not the point.) And it's mine, I tell you, all mine!


  1. I must admit, it does sound like a Christmas gift for someone you have to buy something for but you don't know what. Cool, though.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Mirror, mirror

A little while ago I had the pleasure of giving a talk at the Royal Institution in London - arguably the greatest location for science communication in the UK. At one point in the talk, I put this photograph on the screen, which for some reason caused some amusement in the audience. But the photo was illustrating a serious point: the odd nature of mirror reflections. I remember back at school being puzzled by a challenge from one of our teachers - why does a mirror swap left and right, but not top and bottom? Clearly there's nothing special about the mirror itself in that direction - if there were, rotating the mirror would change the image. The most immediately obvious 'special' thing about the horizontal direction is that the observer has two eyes oriented in that direction - but it's not as if things change if you close one eye. In reality, the distinction is much more interesting - we fool ourselves into thinking that the image behind the mirror is what's on ou